Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Fayric wrote:

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
^Yes, no over-the-top fluff in there.

I wonder how that was rationalized centrally?

Probably for the reason given in the post you refer to: people have to ask why the iquisitors dont go after the wolves, or what would happen if they did. The answer have to be over the top.

So the most fiercely loyal Chapter would outright attack the Inquisitors? Sounds like some heresy to me

Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I'm not saying it's impossible, just that I almost think it'd require a seperate FOC, relics and warlord traits list for each (possibly even some of the wargear options too) and that'd likely end up being relegated to supplement instead of a book that big.

I think that's the best way, ClockworkZion. One codex with all the units, then minidexes full of formations, traits, relics, etc like the Dark Eldar covens book.
Problem being, GW would never do 8 of these. Not even for Imperial marines (Current total of dexes and sub dexes is 7 i think)

Leggy wrote:
I think that's the best way, ClockworkZion. One codex with all the units, then minidexes full of formations, traits, relics, etc like the Dark Eldar covens book.
Problem being, GW would never do 8 of these. Not even for Imperial marines (Current total of dexes and sub dexes is 7 i think)

C:SM
Sup: Clan Raukaan
Sup: Sentinels of Terra
DA
BA
Sup: not yet, but I bet my arse one is coming
SW
Sup: Champions of Fenris
GK
LotD

Those are 8 (9) codices and sups and at least 12 unit/formation/character dataslates among the various marine subtypes. That's more than Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Orks and Necrons combined.

Forgot LotD. Didn't even know Champions of Fenris existed.

 Wyzilla wrote:
Before we get back on track, I need to post this for the dick waving contest.

Wot dah feth 'id you just fething sayz 'bout me, 'ou little grot? I’ll 'ave you roight know I gradujated top of dah Klan in the WHAAAGH! Deff Skulls, 'n I’ve 'in involed 'n lotz sekret WHAAGHS! on dah 'Umies, 'n I 'ave oer' tree hundred gits on mah pole. I kopeed beakie warfare 'n I’m dah top krumper n' dah entire Klan. Youz ar nuttin to me but just 'nother git dat needz krumpin'. I'll stomp you dah gak out 'ith strength dah 'ikes o which ad nevah 'een seen before on dah Gorkin' planet, mark my fething words. You think you ken git away with saying that gak to me over da' warp? Think again, fether. As we speak I am kallin all me kommando an' mek boyz an' dey are trakkin' yur signal all ova' da oonivers, so you betta prepare for dah WAAAGH!, yeh stupid 'umie grit. Dah krumpin' and shootin' storm dat wipes out dah pathetik 'ittle ting you call yer yerself. Yer Morkin dead, git, I kan be anywere, anytime (kuz I'm sneeky like dat), 'n I can krump or shoot yah n 'oer seven 'undred wayz, and dats just 'ith mah bear hands. Not on' am I ektsenseevely trained in choppa-less krumpin', but I 'ave akess to dah entire gear of dah WHAAAAAGH!, 'n I'll yuse it to dah full ektent tah krump yer stoopid teef off dah face of dah land, yeh 'ittle squig. If onlee yeh kud 'ave known wut unorky krumpin yer ittle “klever” coment wuz 'bout tah bring down 'pon yeh, yuh wud 'ave held yer Morkin grot tongue. But ye kudn't, yu didn’t, 'n now yer paying dah price, 'ou squig-herdin idiot. I'll shed spores 'o fury all oer' you 'n you'll drown in et. Yer roight n bloody dead, yeh git.


It was my best job at a translation.

Fix'd

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I love that comment,...never gets old.

because nowadays its better hey?, i mean you don't even have to be an Iron Warrior player to have 9 Oblits and Vindicators( the stuff that people was complaining about IW at the time).

So yeah they need to bring back the old Chaos style, because it was ahead of its time, now it would be mildly fun or even with the weakest of the stronger codexes, but it would be stimm better then the drivel we have to put up.

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I love that comment,...never gets old.

because nowadays its better hey?, i mean you don't even have to be an Iron Warrior player to have 9 Oblits and Vindicators( the stuff that people was complaining about IW at the time).

So yeah they need to bring back the old Chaos style, because it was ahead of its time, now it would be mildly fun or even with the weakest of the stronger codexes, but it would be stimm better then the drivel we have to put up.

Truth. Tho the 3.5 IW army usually brought the IG Bassie as the 4th Heavy for the S9 AP3 Large Blast.

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I love that comment,...never gets old.

because nowadays its better hey?, i mean you don't even have to be an Iron Warrior player to have 9 Oblits and Vindicators( the stuff that people was complaining about IW at the time).

So yeah they need to bring back the old Chaos style, because it was ahead of its time, now it would be mildly fun or even with the weakest of the stronger codexes, but it would be stimm better then the drivel we have to put up.

Nowadays you're not playing with 3rd edition rules so your point is pointless. Back then in the rules and 40k meta that was present at the time, it absolutely was an issue even if you didn't use the broken daemon prince rules.

Winged Daemon Prince with Dreadaxe from 3.5 wasn't broken. Powerful? Yes, but broken? Heck no. There was plenty of scary things in 3.5 but nothing really broken. (expect Necrons...but Necrons have always been OP as hell.)

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Winged Daemon Prince with Dreadaxe from 3.5 wasn't broken. Powerful? Yes, but broken? Heck no. There was plenty of scary things in 3.5 but nothing really broken. (expect Necrons...but Necrons have always been OP as hell.)

IDK.... my winged Manreaper DP was pretty gross. In retrospect, if it wasn't broken, it was at least OP. I think you could really easily game that huge versatility in gear.

Well Nurgle not withstanding as I refuse to use anything he touches, the DP is an easy model to single out, you had to dink and dunk him behind terrain until the moment came to drop him on your opponent's line along with the daemonettes (my primary choice for daemon bomb.) that show up with his banner.

Plus things like the Nightbringer, could wreck him.

I miss my multi-leg deamon prince with an ax of Khorn and powerfist

3.5 wasn't overpowered. It was very good but also had tons of absolutely terrible units. Siren was the only main issue with that book.

Having a few terrible units doesn't matter when the good units are really good.

For example, suppose I doubled the costs of everything in the CSM book that wasn't a CSM or Rhino, so we were looking 100-pt Terminators, etc. but I added a Chaos Ammunition option that made all Bolters S6 AP3 and & Heavy Bolters S8 AP2 for the cost of +20 pts/unit. The book would have terrible internal balance, and the overwhelming majority of units would be absolutely terrible due to ridiculous points costs. However, those CSM with Chaos Ammo would be ridiculously overpowered.

Internal balance does not define competitiveness.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Having a few terrible units doesn't matter when the good units are really good.

For example, suppose I doubled the costs of everything in the CSM book that wasn't a CSM or Rhino, so we were looking 100-pt Terminators, etc. but I added a Chaos Ammunition option that made all Bolters S6 AP3 and & Heavy Bolters S8 AP2 for the cost of +20 pts/unit. The book would have terrible internal balance, and the overwhelming majority of units would be absolutely terrible due to ridiculous points costs. However, those CSM with Chaos Ammo would be ridiculously overpowered.

Internal balance does not define competitiveness.

No but it does define the army. I'd rather have a codex where everything was 'good' and nothing was 'really good'. Then, while i'm wishing for things that'll never be attempted, i'd like every other codex be 'good' at the same level.

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I love that comment,...never gets old.

because nowadays its better hey?, i mean you don't even have to be an Iron Warrior player to have 9 Oblits and Vindicators( the stuff that people was complaining about IW at the time).

So yeah they need to bring back the old Chaos style, because it was ahead of its time, now it would be mildly fun or even with the weakest of the stronger codexes, but it would be stimm better then the drivel we have to put up.

The point, that you missed, was that the book wasn't balanced and I wasn't sure how good the balance of such a book made a these days would be because of how bad the old one was.

I'm not against a book designed that way, just concerned that it might not be done well and result in us being right back to the same sort of "you need to play X or lose" we've had since 3.5.

 Kirasu wrote:
3.5 wasn't overpowered. It was very good but also had tons of absolutely terrible units. Siren was the only main issue with that book.

Codex: Eldar has some rather terrible units in it right now. Still a nasty book.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
3.5 wasn't overpowered. It was very good but also had tons of absolutely terrible units. Siren was the only main issue with that book.

Codex: Eldar has some rather terrible units in it right now. Still a nasty book.

The problem with the 3.5 ed Chaos codex was that relative to all the other codices at the time it could do too many things. That imposed a different sort of imbalance. It was perfectly fine and representative, but the problem was with everything else GW wrote at the time. Unfortunately GW took the most expedient and easy course of action and "fixed" the outlier instead of making it the standard.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I love that comment,...never gets old.

because nowadays its better hey?, i mean you don't even have to be an Iron Warrior player to have 9 Oblits and Vindicators( the stuff that people was complaining about IW at the time).

So yeah they need to bring back the old Chaos style, because it was ahead of its time, now it would be mildly fun or even with the weakest of the stronger codexes, but it would be stimm better then the drivel we have to put up.

The point, that you missed, was that the book wasn't balanced and I wasn't sure how good the balance of such a book made a these days would be because of how bad the old one was.

I'm not against a book designed that way, just concerned that it might not be done well and result in us being right back to the same sort of "you need to play X or lose" we've had since 3.5.

i don't see how ONE of the NINE lists of the book did it make unbalanced..., but that was 10 years ago anyway.

But yeah you're mostly right, chances are that we will again end up with something bunked...

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Moving past the Space Wolves nonsense (which has been around for some time and I don't think debating how silly it is will change that), I do wonder how balanced a book that covers all the legions and renegades could be. I mean the last one lead to the spamming of Iron Warriors everywhere.

I love that comment,...never gets old.

because nowadays its better hey?, i mean you don't even have to be an Iron Warrior player to have 9 Oblits and Vindicators( the stuff that people was complaining about IW at the time).

So yeah they need to bring back the old Chaos style, because it was ahead of its time, now it would be mildly fun or even with the weakest of the stronger codexes, but it would be stimm better then the drivel we have to put up.

The point, that you missed, was that the book wasn't balanced and I wasn't sure how good the balance of such a book made a these days would be because of how bad the old one was.

I'm not against a book designed that way, just concerned that it might not be done well and result in us being right back to the same sort of "you need to play X or lose" we've had since 3.5.

i don't see how ONE of the NINE lists of the book did it make unbalanced..., but that was 10 years ago anyway.

But yeah you're mostly right, chances are that we will again end up with something bunked...

The issue is that the book was bloated and so full of dead weight with one list that was so outstanding that it became a serious no-brainer to play, to the point that people band-wagoned onto it hardcore. I'm not saying we don't have that issue now, but I doubt the studio's ability to make 9+ different lists inside of the same book balanced enough to not put the book in the same place all over again.

Honestly from what I've seen a generic book with a supplement has been a better avenue for creating interesting, flavorful armies that were more balanced. They aren't all perfect, but they seem to do a better job that the codex alone.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The issue is that the book was bloated and so full of dead weight with one list that was so outstanding that it became a serious no-brainer to play, to the point that people band-wagoned onto it hardcore.

Sorry, but you level that criticism at just about every book before 3.5, and since 3.5. "It was unbalanced!!!", so is everything else. "It has too many overpowered/useless units!", so does everything else (and, c'mon, have you read the current Eldar Codex?). The criticisms levelled at 3.5 are in no way unique to 3.5.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Honestly from what I've seen a generic book with a supplement has been a better avenue for creating interesting, flavorful armies that were more balanced. They aren't all perfect, but they seem to do a better job that the codex alone.

Yes, you're right. The loyalist Marine Codex (+ supplements) does a better job of making Chaos armies than the current Chaos Codex.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
The issue is that the book was bloated and so full of dead weight with one list that was so outstanding that it became a serious no-brainer to play, to the point that people band-wagoned onto it hardcore.

Sorry, but you level that criticism at just about every book before 3.5, and since 3.5. "It was unbalanced!!!", so is everything else. "It has too many overpowered/useless units!", so does everything else (and, c'mon, have you read the current Eldar Codex?). The criticisms levelled at 3.5 are in no way unique to 3.5.

I'm not saying that the books aren't a mess, I'm saying that because the books are a mess I'm not sure if the book will ever be done right.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Honestly from what I've seen a generic book with a supplement has been a better avenue for creating interesting, flavorful armies that were more balanced. They aren't all perfect, but they seem to do a better job that the codex alone.

Yes, you're right. The loyalist Marine Codex (+ supplements) does a better job of making Chaos armies than the current Chaos Codex.

Well that's true in some cases.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yes, you're right. The loyalist Marine Codex (+ supplements) does a better job of making Chaos armies than the current Chaos Codex.

I thought for a while now that the best way to represent Alpha Legion would be a C:SM army (Raven Guard got you infiltration, didn't it?) with Stormtrooper allies.

I think the problem is that some people are wanting rules to represent something that doesn't exist anymore. The fluff has changed since 3.5. Now ALL chaos space marine warbands, from your Heresy Era veterans to your most recently turned renegade chapter, ALL fight the same. They are ALL represented by the CSM codex. If you don't think the CSM codex properly represents your legion the problem is not with the codex but rather your outdated vision. The old fluff is gone. The studio wants ALL CSM to be essentially Black Legion with different color schemes. You might not like what the army has become but that's the way GW wants Chaos to work and it's their IP.

CSM are the badguys - that's the role they play in the narrative and faceless mooks work better for that than special snowflakes. If you want special snowflakes go play loyalists. If you wanted an army with their own special story you shouldn't have chosen one whose sole reason for existing is to serve as the badguys in someone else's story.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:
I think the problem is that some people are wanting rules to represent something that doesn't exist anymore. The fluff has changed since 3.5. Now ALL chaos space marine warbands, from your Heresy Era veterans to your most recently turned renegade chapter, ALL fight the same. They are ALL represented by the CSM codex. If you don't think the CSM codex properly represents your legion the problem is not with the codex but rather your outdated vision. The old fluff is gone. The studio wants ALL CSM to be essentially Black Legion with different color schemes. You might not like what the army has become but that's the way GW wants Chaos to work and it's their IP.

CSM are the badguys - that's the role they play in the narrative and faceless mooks work better for that than special snowflakes. If you want special snowflakes go play loyalists. If you wanted an army with their own special story you shouldn't have chosen one whose sole reason for existing is to serve as the badguys in someone else's story.

The only thing I don't like about this approach is it works great for the current point of 40k, but it means we end up lacking on representation between 30k and what's considered to be "now". So if you want to recreate a historical point in the universe you end up with an army that isn't as correct as it should be.

Also even if you argue the warbands things, the warbands still carry specific ways of waging war. A World Eaters warband doesn't do the same things in war as a Death Guard one and the book should at least represent that with tactics rules of some kind.

The book asserts to represent all types of Chaos marines but doesn't; that's its fatal flaw. Renegades as described are closer to the loyalist codex in what they should have and how they work than to the old Legionaries. Meanwhile the Legionaries are either adherent or not to their old Legions; the ones that are should have something resembling their old modus operandi. After all that we have those legionaries who want nothing to do with their old legions and that intermix with renegades more but this is maybe a quarter of Chaos marines. Then you have the fact that Black Legion are the exemplars of this type but even they require a dataslate or supplement to do so. If they want us to play not-legions they have to give us a reason not to, instead they just ignore the demand.

Damn you Phil Kellyyyyyyyy!

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:
I think the problem is that some people are wanting rules to represent something that doesn't exist anymore. The fluff has changed since 3.5. Now ALL chaos space marine warbands, from your Heresy Era veterans to your most recently turned renegade chapter, ALL fight the same. They are ALL represented by the CSM codex. If you don't think the CSM codex properly represents your legion the problem is not with the codex but rather your outdated vision. The old fluff is gone. The studio wants ALL CSM to be essentially Black Legion with different color schemes. You might not like what the army has become but that's the way GW wants Chaos to work and it's their IP.

CSM are the badguys - that's the role they play in the narrative and faceless mooks work better for that than special snowflakes. If you want special snowflakes go play loyalists. If you wanted an army with their own special story you shouldn't have chosen one whose sole reason for existing is to serve as the badguys in someone else's story.

This isn't true though - it's obviously not true to the bulk of the fluff, but it's also not even a true statement about GW's recent handling of their IP. Sure, they have emphasized mixed warbands and recent renegades who have become fully corrupted and somehow lost all their loyalist equipment and gained autocannons. But nothing they have done, to my knowledge, specifically invalidates a lot of things they've said before.

Namely: that a good number of the old legions either still operate as relatively unified forces (Word Bearers and Iron Warriors come to mind in particular as maintaining a good deal of cohesion), or are still represented in the fluff through small mono-legion warbands that would deserve to have a set of rules (take ADB's Night Lords trilogy as an example of a completely fractured legion that still exists in "modern" times in the form of 40k-army-sized elements using the old legion tactics).

GW can try to shove crap like the Crimson Slaughter down our throats as much as they want, but they haven't specifically invalidated the old fluff yet (and if they have I'd like to see examples, so I can finally sever any ties to caring about 40k).


Edit: my apologies for helping take this on a tangent, I think this is a topic for 40k Discussion. To try to bring it back around a bit, I think CSM could be served quite well by one slightly broad codex with no specific representation for the legions (hopefully one with better internal balance and less obviously crappy rules than the current dex), and then a series of supplements for warbands, legion-specific or otherwise.

I also think one possible way to handle renegades and recent traitors would be a supplement that specifically allowed you to ally the loyalist and chaos/daemon codexes, with reasonable limitations on the units you could use and a new "chapter tactic" to represent the loyalists' fall. That lets recent traitors keep some of their equipment, but gain access to some more appropriate allied units.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
I also think one possible way to handle renegades and recent traitors would be a supplement that specifically allowed you to ally the loyalist and chaos/daemon codexes, with reasonable limitations on the units you could use and a new "chapter tactic" to represent the loyalists' fall. That lets recent traitors keep some of their equipment, but gain access to some more appropriate allied units.

That's an idea I can get behind. Basically make a supplement called "Traitors and Renegades" and make it cover all the Marine books and the Imperial Guard. I'd even be okay with it being several books if they had enough fluff material to fully flesh it out.